To hear the White House describe it, the effort was a success by several measures, demonstrating an ability to securely resettle migrants fleeing the worst refugee crisis since the Second World War, and doing so nearly a month ahead of a Sept. 30 deadline.

But the per capita number of Syrian refugees accepted to the U.S. in fiscal 2016 remains dwarfed by goals set by Canada and some other nations. The 10,000 number might even sound low compared to the target of 65,000 that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has proposed.

Just how low?

"This isn't even the floor. This is the basement," said Jennifer Quigley, the refugee protection advocacy strategist for Human Rights First.

Quigley and other refugee advocates are pushing for the U.S. to double last year's global refugee resettlement goals to 200,000 for the next fiscal year, with half the spots reserved for Syrian migrants.

In a February 2016 report, Oxfam calculated that the U.S. had the capacity to absorb about 170,000 Syrian refugees this calendar year. That's 17 times more than the fiscal year pledge outlined for 2015-2016.

To determine what each nation's responsibility for accepting Syrian refugees ought to be, the humanitarian organization crunched the data based on the size of the economies of select nations and came up with what it calls a Fair Share Analysis

According to that analysis, the U.S. has accepted only seven per cent of what it would be expected to since 2013. Canada, which placed more than 30,000 Syrian refugees since the start of last November alone, had a 239 per cent Fair Share score. The Canadian score was based on a pledge of taking in 36,500 Syrian refugees since 2013.

"Canada has been in a really great place. Canada's just outpacing everybody else, aside from Germany, which is fantastic," Quigley said.

Germany, which settled nearly 42,000 refugees fleeing Syrian since 2013, had contributed 113 per cent of its fair share. Other nations highlighted for their Fair Share contributions included Australia, which scored 64 per cent, Sweden (60 per cent), Finland (85 per cent) and Iceland (63 per cent).

While refugee advocates were pleased the U.S. met its resettlement goals this fiscal year, Oxfam America's Noah Gottschalk notes that the announcement comes at an opportune time. Later this month, President Barack Obama is due to convene a summit on refugees at the United Nations General Assembly.

"At the summit to ask world leaders to do more to resettle refugees, it's incumbent for the U.S. to lead by example in this case," said Gottschalk, Oxfam America's senior policy advisor for humanitarian response.

"That 10,000 is a number we could do in our sleep. We were pushing for 10,000 because we thought it was the bare minimum, a number which, although incredibly modest, was at least a starting point."

The U.S. refugee policy post-Obama could vary widely, depending on political will from Congressional leaders to appropriate enough funds for resettlement programs, as well as the vision of the next president.

Although Clinton has called the 10,000 refugees goal a "good start," she said she wishes to expand the program to 65,000. Her Republican opponent has taken a different tack.

Donald Trump is due to deliver a major speech on immigration today from Phoenix, hours after he meets with President Enrique Pena Nieto in Mexico. His speech is expected to focus on undocumented illegal immigrants crossing the border from Mexico, but he may also bring up the U.S.'s handling of the Syrian refugee crisis.

In June, Trump called for the suspension of the State Department's Syrian refugee program, citing security concerns stemming from the "tremendous flow" of migrants.

"We don't know who they are, they have no documentation, and we don't know what they're planning," Trump said during a speech on national security and terrorism following the attack at Orlando's Pulse nightclub, which killed 49 people and wounded 53.

But Gottschalk argues that so-called Trojan Horse concerns about extremists blending in with vulnerable refugee populations are unjustified, cautioning against misinformation by political forces that have sown Islamaphobia.

Those distrustful of refugees often don't understand that they are fleeing the very violent extremism that the U.S. stands against, he says.

"If you're looking at where there's vulnerabilities in the U.S., the refugee program is not it," said Gottschalk.

A bipartisan letter to Congress signed by national security leaders in December 2015 reiterated that point, noting that refugees eligible for resettlement in the U.S. are "vetted more intensively than any other category of traveler" — a rigorous process that can sometimes take more than two years.

Previously, Trump has incorrectly claimed the U.S. has "no system to vet" refugees. His statement was determined to be false by the non-partisan fact-checking project PolitiFact in June.

"There's this narrative that we have no clue who these people are, they're going to show up here, God knows what they're going to do?" said Hans Hogrefe, director of policy at Refugees International. "These are myths and exaggerations and outright defamation against those people who have been carefully vetted and screened."

Welcoming immigrants and vulnerable populations is part of the U.S.'s DNA, Hogrefe says. But he stresses that the burden of hosting refugees can't fall on the U.S. alone.

"We can always do more," he says. "It's not about welcoming a specific number [of refugees]. We have to constantly challenge ourselves and say, can we do more? Can we do better?"

Refugees International (RI) advocates for lifesaving assistance and protection for displaced people and promotes solutions to displacement crises. We are an independent organization, and do not accept any government or UN funding.